Well, the developers behind No on A are trying to top them. Encinitas municipal code prohibits using the public roads and sidewalks for campaign signs. City code enforcement personnel have the job of removing illegally placed signs.
Which is why, just as Stocks and Muir did their Midnight Cowboy stunt on a weekend evening so code enforcement couldn't take down their signs, the No on A people waited until late in the day yesterday, the day before election day, to put dozens of signs all over Vulcan, Santa Fe, Encinitas Boulevard, and Leucadia Boulevard.
Encinitas Undercover contacted Council Member Tony Kranz late in the afternoon yesterday, and he was able to get some of the signs removed before code enforcement went home at 5 pm.
Code enforcement supposedly begins work at 7 am, but signs were still illegally placed all over Vulcan, including right in front of City Hall, around 8:30 am today. So the No on A cheaters succeeded with their plan to get illegal advertising in front of both evening and morning commuters right before the election.
If the developers and city council are on the right side with No on A, why do they have to lie and cheat to win?
City Code Enforcement was contacted as early as mid-last week, with almost no action taken to correct the repeated illegal No sign placements.
ReplyDeleteIf complaint calls were returned at all, the City's response was "we'll log this," or "we'll look into this."
A complaint a week ago on the largest sign at the end of Manchester was met with "we'd have to do a survey to determine whether the sign is on city property or not" (thus subject to removal).
Sounds like Tony took some action, but the City staff was lacking here. They couldn't even be bothered to pretend to care. Lame.
As with any record that reflects their poor personal and professional standards but that is critical to Encinitas citizens, these reports will somehow get 'lost.'
DeleteYes on A, Recall Council, and Fire Gus Vina!
Because the No folks have nothing but greed to support their position, they have to resort to lying, making false claims of support, and now stealing Yes signs and planting theirs illegally.
ReplyDeleteI guess that's all you can do when you don't have a valid argument and you refuse to own the real one: "I am greedy."
Putting this here, as this is the latest post. It is Dr. Lorri's letter re" Sabine on the LB many years ago. TUESDAY, JANUARY 01, 2008
ReplyDeleteDr. Lorri calls out Encinitas city attorney Glen Sabine
A short editorial letter from Dr. Lorri to kick off the good vibes for 2008:
The Brown Act, Proposition 59, and our City Attorney
On November 2, 2004, the voters of California passed Proposition 59. The vote was 83% YES and 16% NO. The intent of the legislation was to enhance the already existing Brown Act, also know as the Sunshine Law. In summary, Prop. 59 added to the Brown Act by further stating that the press and public must have access to the workings of state and local governments and ensure accountability. Prop. 59-made transparency a constitutional duty owed to the people, to whom officials are accountable.
At the December 5, 2007 Encinitas City Council meeting, Councilmember Jerome Stocks was allowed to “daylight” two opinions regarding the Brown Act. These opinions, deemed attorney/client privilege, were given to Mr. Stocks by our contracted City Attorney, Mr. Glenn Sabine. As I read these opinions, I was struck by several thoughts. Nowhere in Mr. Sabine’s response did he refer to Proposition 59, but instead referred to 1964 decisions made before Prop. 59 was even a law. Any citizen who had computer or a library card could have easily obtained the information Mr. Stocks was allowed to “daylight”. Therefore, Mr., Sabine spent our tax dollars giving an opinion that was outdated and certainly nothing only an attorney would know. In my opinion, Mr. Sabine did a disservice to Mr. Stocks and to the citizens of Encinitas, wasting both time and money. Perhaps it is time to review Mr. Sabine’s relationship with the City of Encinitas if this is the best information that he can provide our City.
The Brown Act.org
Smart Voter.org on Prop 59
Ralph M. Brown
City Manager Vina and Mayor Barth and Deputy Mayor Shaffer are responsible for not moving on this. They are classic two-faces. When Stocks put yup signs illegally and Vina cancelled meetigns illegally the two played the role of victims. Now, when they are in power and shennangians happen that suit their needs they do nothing. These are the facts.
ReplyDeleteTommorrow night the Barth Shaffer plan is to muzzle free speech by reducing time limits and time donations or agenda item speakers. They hope to hoodwink the public by increasing the oral communication time, but these are two different things. They want to limit the speech of people who shine a bright spotlight on their incompetence.
Barth is a two-face and Shaffer has no ethics. THE two who said they would give us community participation have recommended doing away or limiting speaker time and time donations to muzzle free speech- they are empress one and empress two - all hail the queen
DeleteRegarding Dr. Lorri'e letter. Wasn't Teresa a main advocate of open government? When did she change. Nothing much has changed since she wrote this in 2008. Different council, same style government.
ReplyDeleteOf all the things wrong In this city, a few signs on the street is what scares yes on A people. Jeez what a bunch of a$$holes.
ReplyDeleteCheating, spinning the facts, name calling...anything to win, eh?
Delete10:09 the city is going bankrupt. The city under Vina raided 5 fully funded capital projects of $7M and then hire a PR guy for 135K while parents seeking 5K to buy playground equipment are told to sit on it-
DeleteGet a clue and some facts, name calling makes you sound ridiculous - is that you Jerome?
Anon 10:25- exactly as you stated look at all the things wrong with this city, not to mention streets that needs paving, lack of sidewalks, the city can't, doesn't, won't maintain the landscaping. Over paid and pensioned staff YET WC chooses to pick on a few No on A signs. Simply horseshit.
DeletePs- I've seen Yes on A signs on public right of way.
Is that you Sheila??
YES folks aren't scared, they're just tired.
DeleteTired of having to explain to voters that yes, they can build a patio/swimming pool/home addition. residence. Tired of having Teresa soldier on with her well-exposed lie on the Coastal Commission. Tired of seeing emails fly between councilmembers and residents that repeat the lies despite knowing better (and trust us, those are circulated widely and will come back to bite).
Tired of seeing Yes supporters' names end up on No material as supposed endorsements.
Tired of fighting an adversary for whom lying and cheating are substitutes for well-reasoned discussions.
The sign crap is just icing on the greed cake, where No people will do anything : anything for a win.
They need to own their argument: they are greedy and want to control this town. Own it and it'll be the first honest thing they do.
10:09 - you're name-calling against the wrong side.
12:10 IS that you Jerome- sure sounds like it, and using the same blame game logic. You admit the city is in horrendous financial shape, due in large measure to your failed leadership, but you then try and blame the yes on A people and Sheila for the fact that the city's financial position is growing worse every day and only more debt will out a Band-Aid on it while the council follows Gus the pied piper of the cliff.
DeleteTeresa (and Tony, on a slate run) claimed her 2008 campaign was "Trust and Transparency."
ReplyDeleteJoke's on us.
word- TnT Tricks not treats -
DeleteCode Enforcement has been very slow at addressing this problem of illegal NO signs. One can't help but wonder if this is intentional given where the council and the city stands on PROP A.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you expect? They report to Gus Vina, and he has proven to be a person of no ethics. He has set himself up as an all powerful dictator who keeps hiring more and more people to give an impression that he is important. Too bad he sends us the bills. Certainly, the idea of 'citizen participation' should involve more than us paying for their mismanagement and their repeated mistakes!
DeleteThis "one" doesn't wonder! :)
DeleteWhat do expect? They are city employees and the city council has made it clear they are NO on A advocates. This city council group is no different than stocks, Bonds,Guerin,Dalager, and Muir group. We are just all disappointed that Barth has gone to the dark side supporting developers that want to ruin our community character.
ReplyDelete-PAST Barth Supporter
Years ago when the money machine was pushing for a Leucadia RDA, a local artist created some warning posters that were attached to telephone poles around west Leucadia. The area was soon flooded with city vehicles to remove them several times a day. See! Code enforcement can be quite effective when it is DIRECTED to be.
DeleteWho runs Barter Town?
ReplyDeleteDevelopers run Barter Town!
10:09 has got some nerve.
ReplyDeleteYES folks aren't scared, they're just tired.
Tired of having to explain to voters that yes, they can build a patio/swimming pool/home addition. Tired of having Teresa soldier on with her well-exposed lie on the Coastal Commission. Tired of seeing emails fly between councilmembers and residents that repeat the lies despite knowing better (and trust us, those are circulated widely and will come back to bite).
Tired of seeing Yes supporters' names end up on No material as supposed endorsements.
Tired of fighting an adversary for whom lying and cheating are substitutes for well-reasoned discussions.
The sign crap is just icing on the greed cake, where No people will do anything : anything for a win.
They need to own their argument: they are greedy and want to control this town. Own it and it'll be the first honest thing they do.
10:09 - you're name-calling against the wrong side...unless you're paid to do so, then I guess that's how you earn your living.
12:57-NICELY DONE.Do sculpins have tear ducts?
DeleteRead Anon 12:10. Learn something.
DeleteBoth side are putting up signs in wrong places and not being honest on their propaganda.
DeleteFacts? Shaffer made the same statement without back-up.
Delete1:13 Polly wants cracker!
DeleteI just voted. $350,000 for this??
ReplyDeleteSo obvious you are a paid troll. Do you even know what "THIS" is?
Delete1:10 Yes, the council ignored Kranz's idea that was supported by attorney Sabine as "novel" and buried Kranz's plan to force a special election- now the council has agreed to hire a new spin doctor PR guy at city hall to do the work the Department heads are supposed to do- Barth, Shaffer, Gaspar are out of control!
ReplyDeleteI was at this meeting. Tony "DID NOT" even make a motion to support this! If I'm wrong please share the motion with me.
DeleteYou'll have an easier time finding HOLY GRAIL.
idea is not a motion. Kranz floated the idea of approving and then authoring an amendment for 2014 saving the city 325K. Sabine called the 'idea' novel. 1:56 does not use the word motion- you will have an easier time finding the holy grail then you will competence on the Encinitas council.
DeleteThe land developers waited until the 11th hour to spring the onslaught of the signage in illegal locations - it avoided bad publicity about not adhering to the laws. Plus there is no time for the contributions to be associated with the special interests, revealing their real motives or unveiling their distortions about the effects of Prop A. The final vote will reveal whether money still rules the electoral process or the desire of the people to decide their own community character will prevail.
ReplyDeleteNo conspiracy though, don't you agree??
DeleteWe won! The majority of voters could not be bought, cowed, coerced or confused to the point of voting NO.
DeleteYES on A prevailed. Congratulations, everyone, and HOORAY for our City.
I couldn't be happier!
What do the results show ?? Did we win??
ReplyDeleteIts looking super close.
ReplyDeleteYES
4142
50.67%
NO
4032
49.33%
http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/voters/results/transform.htm?paramVal1=election.xsl
Yes votes are ahead in the absentee vote by only 110 votes with only 3% counted. I guess we will find out how effective the last minute illegal signs were at convincing voters to vote no.
One thing for certain, I am voting no on Doug Harwood and all the other scumbag developers. Go to Oceanside scumbags! and take Jerome Stocks and Kristen Gaspar with you.
Results are in and it's yes by a landslide , way to go yes on A. Clearly the voters support you by a wide margin. Yeehaa.
ReplyDeletehow do you get that?
ReplyDeleteNew numbers..... this one is over.... put a cork in it. Prop A Won..... .whoooo Hooooo
ReplyDelete40% of voters. Spread over 200 now.
YES
4632
51.06%
NO
4440
48.94%
OK - Its official.... Scumbag developers, Doug Harwood, David Meyers, Shea Homes, Jerome Stocks, Kristen Gaspar, and Gus Vina get the heck out of our town. Your days of selling out our communities quality of life or over and you just wasted over $80,000 trying to defeat the will of the people.
You lose Suckers now pack your bags!!!
I don't know that you can celebrate yet, there is still the overseas votes and military. They can change the outcome.... Let's just keep doing as we always have until their votes are counted. That could take weeks or months.
DeleteWay to go- Yes on A!!!!
ReplyDeleteClearly the voters support you!!!!
Councilmembers take note and listen to the will of the people.
The public is waking up and is not so easily fooled by the big developer money trying to buy election results.
Way to Go Encinitas..... The future looks BRIGHT!!!!!
Next up - Fire Sacramento Gus!
He is wasting our precious tax dollars with every ridiculous move he makes.
It's barely worth mentioning but there are several Yes on A signs placed in illegal locations in Leucadia. I guess WC Varones didn't have his camera handy for those.
ReplyDeleteDo random signs make up voters minds? Do voters see these signs as they text?
Its over. Good night!!!-PROP A CITY OF ENCINITAS Right to Vote Amendment
ReplyDeletePrecincts: 30
Counted: 22
Percentage: 73.3%
Vote for: 1
YES
5272
51.63%
NO
4940
48.37%
the registrar of voters just posted there are 1800 votes mail in ballot votes to count. This sounds strange to me. mail in are supposed to be counted first. This is why it scares me that we are .osing trust in the voting process across the country. That is why some people started a group called True thevote, of course they were harassed by the IRS, then there is the chicago connection to our election, chicago is a political cesspool...............i am just saying, i am waiting to learn more before i think tnis is done. There are literally 100's of millions at risk for a lucky few. Trader joes traded hands for $78 million, jerome stocks then appoint the new owner to erac, he works with harwood and norby to upzone, if he triples the density he triples the value from 78M to $224 million. Government weilds immense power to control results they want. I have a bad feeling, I hope I am wrong
ReplyDeleteyes, add to this who controls the press and the media locally, papa doug manchester and john lynch. They all opposed write editorial and probably worked over our council to oppose A. I thought mail in ballots were always counted first? let's hope nothing shady is going down, it sounds weird, why wouldn't the registrar count all these votes tonight? and if they were mail in they could have been counted today? Remember the no on a people bussed in people for la mesa to fool residents at the street fair, how do we know who these provisional ballots are? no one makes anybody show an ID to vote.
ReplyDeleteThe local media is controlled by Jim Kydd.
DeleteReally? The Coast news printed editorials for Muir, Gaspar, Shaffer , Barth, interview with kranz and editorial by Doug Long.....sounds like an honest paper open to all. Hey maybe Kydd should have big party at the chart house after the election to influence local leaders, yeah,, insider access, that's the ticket, like good old boy papa d
Delete8:17- when you charge the No on A money to run their ad and give FREE ad space to yes on A, that is control. Ask Jerome if " Dumb Stocks " stickers didn't influence the voters. And how we're those stickers distributed??? Jim Kydd - the Coast News.
DeleteJim Kydd controls local media.
Doug Manchester's UT wouldn't print things the Yes folks sent, which is why we had such poor representation there. After awhile, we knew not to bother even trying.
Deleteit was dump stocks, but you are also right, it is dumb stocks. Wonder how Joe Corder is doing these days?
Delete7:32,
ReplyDeleteJim, along with printing articles for NO on A folk also printed NO on A ads in his paper. It was up to the purchaser how big they were. Surprised nobody wanted the front page of the Pennysaver. It's only $750 for delivery to every home in Encinitas.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete